100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

June 27, 2019 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

Thursday, June 27, 2019
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.

ERIN WHITE
Editorial Page Editor

Zack Blumberg
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram

Jeremy Kaplan
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury

Alex Satola
Timothy Spurlin
Nicholas Tomaino
Erin White
Ashley Zhang

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

CASSANDRA MANSUETTI
Editor in Chief

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

The
lack
of
adequate
reasoning
for
Schlissel’s
abstention
from
testifying,
especially in a situation where
he is not intended to be cross-
examined, is concerning. It is
clear that President Schlissel’s
position grants him oversight
over the University as a whole,
but
it
remains
worrisome
that
he
is
uncomfortable
or
incapable
of
publicly
explaining the intricacies of the
University’s sexual misconduct
policy; a policy that is integral
to student safety and rights.
These sentiments were publicly
supported by Judge Arthur
Tarnow, who criticized Schlissel
for his and the University’s
unwillingness
to
streamline
the case proceedings, writing,
“The
University’s
attorneys
appear to be more concerned
with
keeping
the
President
out of the public eye than with
prompt resolution of this case

and providing a fair process for
adjudicating sexual misconduct
claims.”
The lack of definitive public
figures
surrounding
the
University’s sexual misconduct
policy
points
to
broader
confusion
surrounding
the
foundation of the policy itself.
When legal representatives for
the University offered to bring
in a different spokesperson to
testify about the sexual assault
policy, they were unable to
identify who that would be
when prompted by the judge.
This begs the question: Who
is the authority who can be
held accountable for the policy
and
its
implementations,
if
not President Schlissel? It is
evident that the University
does not have a clear person in
charge and is hoping to merely
avoid
confrontation
about
this lack of leadership. This is
unacceptable, and we implore

the University to point to a
clear and reliable source on the
matter.
Considering
the
current
social
climate
regarding
sexual misconduct, especially
within institutions of higher
education across the country,
we feel that President Schlissel
and
the
University
should
be considering a settlement
meeting
regarding
these
University policies to be a top
priority. Delaying the process
more will ultimately only serve
to undermine the University’s
authority on the subject going
forward.
The
University’s
President should have a clear
idea
of
the
direction
we
are moving in terms of our
treatment of accusations and
cases of sexual misconduct, and
avoiding policy discussions like
this is only counter-productive
to the creation of a fair and safe
school environment.

D

ioxane, a potentially carcino-
genic chemical that has
leaked into Ann Arbor’s
aquifer slowly over two decades
from Gelman Sciences, Inc., was
found in our drinking water on
two separate occasions in the
Huron River and Barton Pond.
The plume, discovered in well
water in 1985, has migrated in the
groundwater over the last three
decades and now encompasses a
much larger area. While the fed-
eral, state and local governments
have been entrenched in legal
battles over this environmental
issue, the threat to public health
has steadily increased.
As a Masters of Social Work
student at the University of Mich-
igan, and as someone who cares
not only about the environment
but also the health and well-being
of students and community mem-
bers who drink this water, it is
alarming that this issue has gone
unresolved for decades. Across
the state and country, similar
issues have taken several years
and an abundance of resources
to resolve (Flint, Baltimore and
several others). As a result of
agonizingly slow and expensive
undertakings, residents are left
endangered, confused and often
defeated, lacking a real solution.
The longer we wait for the gov-
ernment to devise a plan, the lon-
ger Ann Arbor residents have to
worry about their ability to feel
safe and healthy while enjoying
the natural resources around
them.
While some feel powerless to
address issues like the dioxane
plume, I am not alone in feel-
ing the University of Michigan
should look locally for solutions
and start doing the necessary
research regarding this poten-
tial health hazard. Perhaps the
University lacks a sense of urgen-
cy — even government officials
litigating the issue seemingly
lack this resolve. Or maybe the
donation made by the family of
the founder of Gelman Sciences,
Inc. to U -M’s Risk Science Cen-
ter creates a conflict of inter-
est and gives pause to action.
Regardless of the root cause, the
wealth of knowledge and poten-
tial resources from a university
should not be held back when jus-
tice and the safety of the commu-
nity is at stake.
In social work, our mission
is to promote social justice and
the dignity and worth of all indi-

viduals regardless of race, socio-
economic status and background.
This includes advocating for our
community and its members,
ensuring they have access to the
resources needed to live healthy
and fulfilling lives. Issues like
the dioxane plume dispropor-
tionately
affect
communities
of color and vulnerable people.
Given this marked disparity, it
is everyone’s responsibility to
raise awareness and promote
action around issues in order to
serve these marginalized com-
munities that may not have the
resources to adequately advocate
for themselves. This call applies
not only to social workers, but to
all schools within the University
of Michigan that seek to produce
leaders within their field of study
and continue to build the prestige
of the University.
At the University of Michi-
gan, we claim to be “the Lead-
ers and Best.” But, is that motto
fulfilled in our relationship with
nearby
communities?
When
we, as a University community,
choose to bypass opportunities
to perform research and develop
high-impact projects that cre-
ate positive change in our own
neighborhoods, we fail to uphold
that
standard.
By
investing
research capabilities and skills in
environmental safety and public
health projects, we could utilize
the privilege afforded to the Uni-
versity of Michigan and play an
active leadership role in the com-
munity, laying the groundwork
for positive community interac-
tion. Reassuringly, several stu-
dents have already taken up this
call and have begun to pioneer
their own initiatives to support
their community.
The environmental and health
impacts for the greater Ann
Arbor area due to the dioxane
plume worsen as time passes,
and there is still no solution in
sight. The University of Michigan
should leverage its resources and
the skills of students and faculty
to develop innovative solutions to
this decades-long problem and, in
doing so, renew its dedication to
serving its neighbors. Neglect-
ing to do so will result in further
contamination
and
ill-placed
reliance on time-consuming legal
action.

Is the University responsible for local issues?

MEGAN VAN KOOTEN | OP-ED

Megan Van Kooten is a Masters of

Social Work Candidate at the University

of Michigan.

FROM THE DAILY

The University needs to stop dragging its feet
O

n June 13, 2019, University of Michigan President Mark Schlissel
was due in U.S. District Court in Detroit to explain the University’s
sexual misconduct policy in a settlement conference for the ongoing
Doe v. University of Michigan lawsuit. On June 12, this hearing was delayed
until further notice. The stay, prompted by an emergency petition sent by
University lawyers, was the latest in a set of actions by the University to
keep Schlissel from testifying publicly on the matter. We as an Editorial
Board feel that the University should stop delaying the case and encourage
President Schlissel to appear before the court; furthermore, we find the
University’s lack of clarity surrounding the policy in question to be extremely
disconcerting, and it should be actively working to remedy this issue.

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan